dismissed EB-1C Case: Handyman Services

identifiing data deleted to 
prevent cleari) l~!lwarranted 
invasion of personal pnvacj 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U. S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
Office of24dministrative Appeals MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
PUBLIC COPY 
File: Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER 
SRC 09 061 52895 
 Date: JAN 2 7 2010 
Petition: 
 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as a Multinational Executive or Manager Pursuant to 
Section 203(b)(I)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1153(b)(l)(C) 
IN BEHALF OF PETITIONER: SELF-REPRESENTED 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
This is the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All documents have been returned to 
the office that originally decided your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office. 
Vhief, Administrative Appeals Office 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Texas Service Center, denied the immigrant visa petition. The matter is now 
before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be rejected as untimely filed. 
In order to properly file an appeal, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 103.3(a)(2)(i) provides that the affected party 
must file the appeal within 30 days of service of the unfavorable decision. If the decision was mailed, the 
appeal must be filed within 33 days. See 8 C.F.R. 5 103.5a(b). 
In accordance with 8 C.F.R. 5 103.2(a)(7)(i), an application received in a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration 
Services (USCIS) office shall be stamped to show the time and date of actual receipt, if it is properly signed, 
executed, and accompanied by the correct fee. For calculating the date of filing, the appeal shall be regarded 
as properly filed on the date that it is so stamped by the service center or district office. 
The record indicates that the director issued the decision on May 13, 2009. It is noted that the director 
properly gave notice to the petitioner that it had 30 days to file the appeal. The appeal was received by 
USCIS on June 17,2009, or 35 days after the decision was issued. Therefore, the appeal was untimely filed. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 103.3(a)(2)(v)(B)(I) states that an appeal which is not filed within the time 
allowed must be rejected as improperly filed. Accordingly, the appeal in the instant case will be rejected. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 103,3(a)(2)(v)(B)(2) states that, if an untimely appeal meets the requirements of a 
motion to reopen or a motion to reconsider, the appeal must be treated as a motion, and a decision must be 
made on the merits of the case. The submissions in the present matter do not meet the requirements of a 
motion. Therefore, the matter will not be returned to the director for further consideration. 
In the present matter, the director determined that the petitioner failed to establish that the petitioner met the 
requirements described at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.50)(3)(i)(B), which states that the petitioner must establish that the 
beneficiary was employed abroad in a qualifying managerial or executive position for at least one out of the 
three years prior to his entry to the United States as a nonimmigrant to work for the same employer. On 
appeal, the beneficiary asks the AAO to reconsider the adverse decision on the basis of documentation that 
the beneficiary failed to previously submit. It is noted that the material submitted on appeal about the 
petitioner's handyman business in Florida does not relate to the director's basis for denying the petition. 
In visa petition proceedings, the burden of proving eligibility for the benefit sought remains entirely with the 
petitioner. Section 29 1 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 136 1. The petitioner has not sustained that burden. 
ORDER: 
 The appeal is rejected as untimely filed.